component view packages/components

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello,

how can I find out, which classes are assigned to which
component (in component view)?

Greets
Michael

[thomaskilian]

You can drag the class over the component. You will then be asked whether this class represents a port (an interface for the component) or a part (something working inside).

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello,

thank you for your answer, but this isn't what I wa asking for.

I don't want to know how to assign a class to a diagram.

I want to know which classes are already assigned to a component.

We were using rose and switched to EA. In rose this was pretty easy. I can't see this in EA.

Can someone help?

[thomaskilian]

I know that rose has a list of check marked classes for each component. EA doesn't do it this way. Either you do it the way I mentioned (this is NOT diagramming) or you draw Realization relationships between class and component.

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello,

thank you for your anser.

We have 5000+ classes.
Shall I drag and drop 5000+classes into each component to find out which class is in which component?

Greets
Michael

[Martin Terreni]

I guess this would be very hard work for one person. you should delegate it to poeple in charge of each component. same as you would develope 5000 classes alone you shouldnt model them alone either.

sorry I havent got the magic answer for you....

[thomaskilian]

Probably your question is not clear. Where does your model stem from? Is it a reverse engineered model? Likely someone already has defined components, but where? EA does not create components when re-engineering. You likely have to do it manually.

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello,

thank you.
Yes you are totally right.
The packages and classes are assigned to different persons in a big team.

And that is the problem. If one team member wants to know in which component which class is implemented, he has to ask the correct person.

But who is the correct person, and is the person available.

Due to this question we need a tool that answers us the question.

EA is unbeatable in price/performance and thats the reason we switch from rose to EA.

But some corners are still dark (of course, darkness is everywhere in each product).
Please give light into it.

Greets Michael

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello,

think about a model with 5000+ classes spreaded over
about 100 component packages each having some components.

Now a new team member wants to use class A.

In which package is it?
Is it in a package/component?
Do I have to create a new one?


So the question of the new developer is:

How can I see it in the modell?

In rose, open conext menu of UML class and you can navigate to the component list in which the class is implemented.

In EA we have some problems finding out that.
Isn't it?

Greets Michael

[thomaskilian]

Michael,
if you create a realization link between the class an the componment you can see this in the Relations window or even better you can use the Relationship matrix. Here you can create or delete the relationship in even a better way than rose is doing this.

Your components can be assigned to people by just using the Author property. I guess in that way you alway have a good picture of the project.

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello Thomas,

assigning the person is what we are already doing.
But this is not a good solution for problem it's a supporting solution. People come and go and/or are out of office. So the tool must provide the info without asking the person.

The realise relationship is a good way.

What I would expect from EA, that it is adding this relationship automatically when classes are assigned to components. Thats sort of the way rose is doing it.

Every manually action in this context can be forgotten and than you have the same problem.

Thank you for your help.
I think we will go this way.

TO SAPRX: Can you think about adding this functionality?

Greets Michael

[thomaskilian]

Please try View/Relationship Matrix. Select the (top) package with your classes as source and restrict to type Class. Target shall be your component package with restriction to Component. Now you have a matrix where you can create new relations (assign classes to component).

[Tjerk]

Hi Michael,

You're saying "when classes are assigned to components" (two messages ago), what is the action that you take? It seems like you're stating that nog EA, but the modeller takes an action here.

You also had a couple of questions on crossreferences, I think you can use the Search and the Locate in Projecttree functions.

Next to the relationship view, there is also a possibility to see the links when the properties of a class are viewed. And there is also a hierarcy window that can be shown on your desktop.

[Mr. Sanders]

Hello,

yes, I was talking about the modeller.
Every solution has its pros and cons.

No solution is as easy as it is in rose.

In rose: right click on class. click on properties. click on components

Than you see to which component the class is already assigned.


Think about that usability. It would be nice having it that easy.

It's absolutly necessary in large projects.
And getting it fast makes the user (probably only me, I don't know) happy.


>
Next to the relationship view, there is also a possibility to see the links when the properties of a class are viewed. And there is also a hierarcy window that can be shown on your desktop.

Thats right. But when you assign a class to a component, you don't have an link, so you can't see one.

A proper solution would be to automatically assign a realisation link between class and component, when the user drops the class onto a conponent.

Than you would have the links.

I think my problem is, that I think too strong in rose structures (10 years experience leave their footprint in brain).

I have some troubles with the component view.
But I will open another thread for that.

Thank you.
Michael

[thomaskilian]

In rose: right click on class. click on properties. click on components
 

In EA: have the relations window docked somewhere. Click on the class and you instantly see the relations to the package.

I also worked with rose before and had to start thinking different. But once I did I never wanted to go back